Why It Matters The Implications of Autonomous Processes for Dual Process Theories—Commentary on Evans & Stanovich

Perspectives on Psychological Science 8 (3):253-256 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Evans and Stanovich propose that Type 1 processes should be defined in terms of autonomy, such that they are initiated and run to completion in the presence of relevant triggering conditions. In this commentary, I argue that their autonomous execution has implications for the nature of the representation that is formed and for the shape and outcome of subsequent Type 2 processes. In addition, I argue that Type 2 processes may also be triggered automatically, but that, unlike Type 1 processes, their completion requires working memory resources, and that the outcome of those processes is more flexible than that of Type 1 processes



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 86,468

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Dual-Process Theories of Higher Cognition Advancing the Debate.Jonathan Evans & Keith E. Stanovich - 2013 - Perspectives on Psychological Science 8 (3):223-241.
Dual-Process and Dual-System Theories of Reasoning.Keith Frankish - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (10):914-926.
An architecture for dual reasoning.Peter Carruthers - 2008 - In Jonathan Evans & Keith Frankish (eds.), In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond. Oxford University Press.


Added to PP

11 (#937,721)

6 months
1 (#870,792)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?